Indeed, an A grade isnt a possibility overnight.
However, we have to find a way to get there or, we will forever be at risk, notwithstanding that, the criteria isn't set in stone.
The worry is that, should we be in the top 12 for next season, this may be with the benefit of a Championship GF and and appearance in the 1895 final and
these cant be replicated if we are in SL but, other clubs mat be able to benefit from these points in future seasons.

That's a very good point.
It helps us this year but it has to be a case of lifting us to 7th place not 12th place.

But just to prove the point, Hull have a grade A but they could easily lose it this year. It won't relegate them but as you don't get a grade overnight, you can lose it overnight.
It's got to be an ongoing focus

Continuous improvement until you get to a score that can no longer improve. Hull FC are a good example that's its not all on field perforce to get grade A, they've been pretty dreadful these last 5 years or so. They will benefit from population and a large fan base that we don't, so on field is more important to us.

They're in the same Catchment figures band as Wakefield 130-260K

(don't forget its split between all teams in the councils district)

Thought Hull was bigger than that. Fair enough.

To me this is one of the ludicrous ideas of IMG that needs scrapping. If the politics of the area were changed, for instance Wakefield bacame a City authority again and a political boundary was drawn somewhere over the common to separate us from the five towns, we would gain IMG points. A clubs standing should not be dictated by a political boundary on a map.

Absolutely agree, you should only be scored on things you can influence/effect/improve, this criteria is totally out of the hands of clubs and I can only think of one team that benefits from it in a way that may get them enough points, I won’t say which team that is but it has a BD post code

I agree.
I understand what they were trying to do but it would have been better to just calculate by population in a particular radius, not a political one.

They are trying to work out supporter potential but both Cas and Wakefield have a fair proportion of their fan base outside the postcode.

This is a bit of a grey area and I’m not sure your right What points they would gain, they would lose in other respects as I understand it

Mainly they would be secondary tenants and thus have no control of the stadium. This is one of the biggies.

So technically they would have a grade A in terms of structure, but nothing else.

Is that enough to get into SL? After all Widnes, York and Donny to name but three have grade A stadiums and nobody is touting them to get a top 12 spot.

Even more glaring is that London play in a potentially grade A, they are already in SL but that won’t save them.

I'd have thought Odsal already ticked the stadium boxes as much as Valley Parade does for IMG.
Slightly better if they have a screen digital advertising.
They'd lose the primacy of tenure score though....which is the same as screen and leds put together.

A lot go on about stadium score but its actually only 3 points in total (15%).
It's just that part of the points are purchasable like LED and screen.

Facility score is either 0.5 or 1.5 depending whether you hit the criteria.
We didn't last time but will now, so we can be confident of lifting from 12.52 to 13.52 if nothing else changes.

Then you have Primacy of tenure (0.25) Utilisation (1) LED (0.125) and screen(0.125)


Bradford were 12.02 so if they already have that facilities point, they'll have to find points somewhere else to move up the table.

Cas are in the same boat as us as that point is available to them but all the other clubs around us already have it so can't use it to increase score.
That's Salford, Huddersfield, Toulouse (I think) and Leigh.

I don't think Cas have a permanent screen so they could add 0.125 if they bought one.

Salford and Huddersfield lose 0.25 for tenancy compared to the rest too.

No one gets the full mark on utilisation as it's the percentage of the ground capacity you fill on match days.
Ironically we do ok on this because our capacity is smaller.

I can't remember which one it was, but a journalist did a breakdown of points if they moved to Valley Parade. I'll see if I can find it. Not saying they were totally correct, but they'd a better understanding of it than I do.